It is important to remember—and I do not think anybody challenged it — that we have a very liberal import regime, in fact, one of the most liberal in the world, and in taking this step we are not stepping out of line with the import-export activities of other what I may call like-minded countries. This liberal regime that we have enjoyed has been to our advantage in many cases because it gave our importers, whether they be importers of raw materials, of semi-manufactured goods or of consumer goods, the opportunity of getting their requirements in any part of the world at the cheapest possible prices. That was important and it still is important from the point of view of manufacturers or producers generally who import raw materials or semi-manufactured goods because it makes them in turn more competitive when they can get their raw materials or other materials of industry at a favourable rate.
However, as has been observed, we have been importing a great imbalance of goods as far as our trading arrangements are concerned from Iron Curtain countries and I want to assure the House that the purpose of this Bill is limited absolutely to Iron Curtain countries. It would, perhaps, have been possible to set out in a schedule the countries which we intend to have covered by the Bill but I wanted, first of all, to have the greatest possible degree of flexibility and, secondly, I do not think it is necessary for us at this stage to take on ourselves to designate who or what are the Iron Curtain countries. We do not know if the Iron Curtain will recede or if it will expand. We hope it will not expand but we do not know. It is not for us to say and especially not on this Bill.
Therefore, there will be no question whatever of employing the provisions of this Bill against what we call like-minded countries and, particularly, as I said, countries with whom we have trade agreements or other international trading arrangements.
I said just now that we had one of the most liberal regimes in the world and in introducing this measure we were not doing anything other countries had not done. I may say in particular that Great Britain has machinery which is more effective, if you like, than what we propose to do here to restrict imports. So have the other countries with whom we normally trade. I think I can assure Deputy Cosgrave that in introducing this measure we are doing nothing that will in any way prejudice our application for entry to the Common Market, or, being in the Common Market, that will embarrass us in any way. In fact, it is quite possible that legislation such as this might be necessary for us if we do become members of the Common Market in order to achieve the same effect as far as the Common Market countries as a whole are concerned as we want to achieve now in respect of ourselves.
With regard to the trade agreements with other countries to which Deputy Cosgrave referred, these agreements are reviewed periodically. The two major agreements we have are with France and with West Germany, and these agreements are reviewed at two-yearly or three-yearly periods—I forget exactly which. However, the whole ambit of the agreements may be reviewed at any one of these two-yearly or three-yearly periods.
As far as our trading agreements with smaller countries are concerned, there is no set period in which these agreements are renewed or reviewed. Therefore, they can be reviewed at any time at short notice. As Deputy Cosgrave perhaps knows as well as I do, the driving of bargains with some of these countries has not been an easy exercise for our representatives. It has been their practice to drive as hard a bargain as possible in all these cases. However, that is beside the point in this Bill.
I now come to another question raised by Deputy Cosgrave—his suggestion that the type of activity we sought to control was not of such great urgency as would require measures of this type to be taken but rather that some post factum remedy might be applied. It is possible—in fact it is more than likely, I think, in many cases—that quick action should be available to us if we knew of a trader who was buying bulk quantities from one of these Iron Curtain countries and if we had goods that one of these Iron Curtain countries might well take from us—from a private exporter, of course. We should have a power to act quickly to ensure that our currency would not be used to buy vast quantities of particular goods, while another trader in this country would have big quantities of goods he could not dispose of in any country and which could easily be disposed of in the Iron Curtain country which is selling us these goods. As well as that, the type of goods we normally get from these countries are goods that can be imported in fairly large bulk. I need only refer to some of the commodities over the past few years— oil seedcake and meal, corn offals, unrefined sugar, steam coal and timber. These are goods that can be exported readily in very large bulk consignments and one consignment might easily create a very wide imbalance in our trade with these countries. Therefore, we should have the power to ensure that transactions we know might be contemplated can be stopped at the source, unless there is some corresponding advantage for exporters in this country. I suggest there is a good reason for this normal procedure whereby we act and let the action be justified in the House afterwards, if necessary, or nullified, as the case may be.
The only penalty provided for in the Bill is in relation to the non-disclosure or giving of false information in the case of applications for licences but the ordinary customs and excise penalties would apply in the event of evasion of the provisions of any order made under the Bill. I can assure Deputy Cosgrave that is very well covered already. Deputy de Valera raised the question of existing contracts, and what would happen in the event of goods being consigned under contract and being landed at a point of entry in this country. I can assure Deputy de Valera that my Department have very long experience of these activities. They are used to examining the bona fides of these contracts and, by and large, bona fide transactions that have taken place before a particular tariff or other import restriction is imposed will not suffer. If these transactions are bona fide, they will be honoured by my Department as a general rule. Again, as far as the issuing of licences is concerned, it is an exercise which is very common in my Department and I do not think there need be any fears that there will be delays in issuing licences in proper cases.
Deputy P. Hogan referred to the figures from Russia and Poland within the past year or so. He is quite correct —there was over £1,000,000 worth of goods imported from Russia as against £154 worth of exports to Russia, and there was something short of £2,000,000 from Poland as against a very small export value of goods to Poland. Therefore, it is clear that the necessity for this Bill is there and I am glad the House has received it in the manner it has been received.